استكشف المجموعة الواسعة من العناوين المتاحة.

Hearing the word ‘death’ applied to oneself is a remarkably sobering experience. This is particularly true when the ‘one’ being referred to is a Pentecostal, a theologian, and a friend of Martin Luther. Reading Luther with Pentecostal ears is always a deconstructive process against the accumulated Luther scholarship that champions his view of the objective nature of Word and Sacrament over against the vicissitude of spiritual experience. Nevertheless, two moments in Luther’s life (the recovery of Philip Melanchthon and the death of his daughter Magdalena) open perspectives on the personal appropriation of the theologia crucis in the later Luther. In the process they illuminate the Pentecostal longing for healing, while critiquing some of its popular paradigms. Together they voice this particular ‘one’s’ journey through a bout of cancer.

This article compares the relational anthropologies of Martin Luther and Martin Buber and suggests that both thinkers presuppose a notion of creative dialogue. This notion captures the understanding in the Hebrew Bible of the world as created and sustained through God’s utterance and, thus, of reality as spoken and human existence as reliant upon dialogue with God. It argues that this common grounding led Luther and Buber to suggest anthropologies that focus on relation rather than substance, on the role of language, and on creative dialogue as the kernel of sound interpersonal relationships, which articulate the human relationship with God. The perception of reality as constituted through dialogical relationships made them both question the prevailing philosophical ontology of their time: in Luther’s case, Aristotelean substance ontology, and in Buber’s case, Kantian subject–object dualism.

This article seeks a way for preachers to use Martin Luther’s theology today without succumbing to Luther’s anti-Semitism. Its place in the discipline of homiletics is of hermeneutics and general sermon direction. I argue that Luther’s anti-Semitism is theological, and that in order to avoid anti-Semitism, Luther’s theology must be changed. I also argue that the concept of decoloniality offers a way forward, specifically in hybridizing Luther’s theology in today’s world.

This article argued the following points. Firstly, the challenge posed by artificial intelligence (AI) to the essence of humanity is serious. Secondly, it is important to analyse the external context and internal dynamics of the history of interaction between knowledge and power. Thirdly, it is necessary to trace the intellectual history of humanity becoming god-like. Finally, by combining Martin Luther’s anthropology with insights from social science and philosophical theology, this article advocated for guiding human beings to use their capabilities for good rather than evil through ethical and legal constraints. Efforts in Chinese context should be made to resolve the conflict between humanity’s pursuit of omnipotence and its failure to develop towards complete goodness, so as to avoid catastrophic consequences for humanity.Contribution: The present article’s special contribution was the theological reflection referring to AI’s challenges to the essence of humanity from Luther’s anthropology in Chinese context. The conflict between omnipotence and omnibenevolence has been highlighted as the key problem which human beings need to solve in the face of AI’s challenge.

The “Young, Restless, Reformed” movement has sought to establish itself upon reformational foundations rooted within the sixteenth century. The new movement’s undertaking, however, has virtually ignored the differences between its own adherence to “limited atonement” and the developed theology of Martin Luther. Even on an academic level, the legacy of gratia universalis ensconced within confessional Lutheranism has been largely lost to the Reformed imagination. This article focuses upon relevant materials in Luther’s Lectures on Galatians (1531/1535) and his Sermon on John 1:29 (1537), as well as the pertinent statements found within early Lutheran confessions. What emerges is a Lutheran tradition that espoused both “unconditional election” and a robust form of “unlimited atonement,” a divine provision of redemption and satisfaction for all. In Lutheran theology, this provision in Christ extra nos serves as an objective foundation for confident faith. As contemporary Reformed scholars increasingly delve into the diversity of the Reformed tradition within early modernity, the distinctive Lutheran voice is another legacy worth remembering.

Watchman Nee’s anthropology has been widely debated and polarized in academic fields. However, Watchman Nee’s concept of human and the problem of ecclesiastical practices have often been overlooked in contemporary Chinese mainland churches. In the first three sections, this paper will start from different Chinese mainland denominations’ interpretation of Nee’s concept of human and their corresponding ecclesiastical practices. On the one hand, through the interpretive attitudes of different denominations toward the “concept of human” and their related ecclesiastical practices, we can see the situation of acceptance of Nee’s anthropology in different contemporary Chinese denominations. On the other hand, we can also provide feedback for the academic research on Nee’s anthropology from the reality of contemporary Chinese mainland churches. Then, this paper will make a comparison of anthropologies between Luther and Watchman Nee, referring to the current study of Martin Luther and the Third Enlightenment in China. The comparative study of these two men will not only open up new avenues for the study of their theologies but will also serve Chinese mainland churches by utilizing the results of the research on Nee’s thoughts and Martin Luther and the Third Enlightenment.

In this article, a case study is utilized to determine how personal relations and individual life events were used as tools in religious politics in the sixteenth century. The correspondence of sixteenth-century reformer Martin Luther is examined between 1528–1530 regarding Wolf and Katharina Hornung’s marriage and the role of Luther’s opponent, Joachim I Nestor, Elector of Brandenburg (1484–1535), in their case. By investigating Luther’s representation of this marital strife, the relationship between personal and political is examined to determine if and how he used the case as means of religious–political influencing. The main method used is careful close reading. At the explicit level, Luther’s aim in the case was to restore the Hornung marriage by bringing Wolf and Katharina back together. His letters suggest there was competition for Katharina between Wolf and Joachim, which actually, in his rhetoric, turned out to be a competition of two men representing different religious views: an evangelical one and a Catholic one. I will argue that in Luther’s efforts to maintain the marriage and the prevailing gender system, the underlying goal was to gain power over an opposing religious–political figure and to prove one’s own supremacy.

Protestantism is usually thought of as rejecting the figure of Mary as a collaborator in Christ’s redemption. In Luther’s commentary on the Magnificat (1521), we can see that this doctrine would continue to evolve throughout his life, and would not always be free of apparent ambiguities. Luther extolled the figure of Mary, but at the same time he could not avoid reinterpreting her according to the presuppositions of the doctrine of justification and his theology of the Cross, and he understands the figure of Mary as a Mater dolorosa, as one who participates in a special way in the sorrow of her Son. Her union with the Saviour means she shares his pain. In these lines, we intend to look at the main points proposed by the German reformer in his new perspective on Mariology, and the possible influence of this change in spirituality on painting, for example, in The Crucifixion (1532) by Luther’s personal friend Lucas Cranach the Elder, and we propose a comparison with The Lamentation of Christ (1502), painted before the Reformation.

Ancient Aesopian fables continued to capture the imagination, reaching even into Lutheran Wittenberg. Luther, concerned to address morality within the church and community, sanctioned the use of fables with some caution. Ever cautious not to obscure the gospel, he referred to fables as a tool in his preaching and his table-talks. This is a neglected tool, the rediscovery of which may prove useful to pastoral ministry for its ability to stimulate visualising and excite verbal communication in illustrating something of the complexity of Christian and daily living. While fables never gained much popularity in Reformed circles, it is worth revisiting for insights in how Martin Luther put it to use.ContributionAs in Reformation Wittenberg, a fable today has the latent promise to be a useful instrument in promoting gospel morality not only among children, but also among adults. To successfully reach that end, the church needs to be creative, even to the extent of fashioning contemporary fables to address daily tensions within its community and beyond.

This article investigates an uncharted facet of Martin Luther’s Hebrew translation method. It is one of the more fascinating aspects of his translation, which demonstrates both the complexity of how he translated Hebrew and the lasting impact of the Hebrew on his German, neither of which has been fully appreciated by scholars. This article demonstrates how he sometimes blended Hebrew and German idioms in his translation of the Hebrew Bible, specifically in the Minor Prophets. It further shows how he used this translation method to convey various linguistic features of the Hebrew language to his German audience. Finally, it shows how this has a number of important implications for Luther studies, Hebrew and German linguistics, and medieval and early modern history.